Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

View

Discuss

Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

StArSkY writes "The Age in Australia has an article today explaining the experiences of a Melbourne guy who purchased the Norah Jones CD tht is 'copy protected.' Unfortunately the only way he could listen to the CD on Apple computers or Intel computers running XP was to copy the CD. This sort of defeats the purpose of the copy protection in the first place. Serious yet amusing at the same time."

In Australia there is a specific legal right to make a backup copy of software...

which the recording industry here is trying to get revoked. Given the Australian Federal Government's record for rolling over to industry demands, I'm not taking bets as to how long this right will last.

AFAIK in Finland you are even allowed to share your own legal music with your friends/family. As you can imagine, because of the p2p networks there have been serious discussion in who really is your friend (eg. the guy living in the States that you have never seen, but you know him by IRC, is he your friend?). It will be interesting to see how things will end up.

Our copyright law is rather anal. Contrary to popular belieft you can't copy something for personal use at all. No exceptions.

For you to copy ANY music requires permission from the songwriter, the musicians and the distributor as they each hold a copyright for a seperate part of the article (music, lyrics and the sound recording itself).

That being said, if someone infringes someone's copyright it's a civil action rather than a criminal action (except when its a for-profit). We also have something similar to the DMCA except it only enables civil suits (ie, if I remove DeCSS from a DVD the DVD company come sue me if they feel I'm doing anything nasty).

How if you want to have fun when entering Australian customs, if they ask if you are a convicted felon, asnwer "Oh, is that still a requirement?". But be ready for no sense of humor and a quick return flight.

The Oz Copyright Council [copyright.org.au] says otherwise. When it comes to fair use, we are teh suck.

choice quotes:

Using a CD burner to make a copy of material will "reproduce the work" for the purposes of copyright, as will making
a tape from a CD, or copying a tape or copying vinyl records onto tape or CD.

and:

There is no exception in the Copyright Act that allows copyright material to be reproduced for private purposes
without permission from the copyright owner.

There was at one stage an attempt to bring in a "blank tape levy" scheme in Australia, under which private taping of
recorded music would have been made legal, with copyright owners receiving compensation through a small
additional charge on blank tapes. The way the government at the time attempted to implement the scheme was,
however, found to be unconstitutional by the High Court, and Australian governments have not made any further
attempts to introduce a scheme which avoids the problems of the earlier attempt. Blank tape levy schemes operate
successfully in a number of other countries, particularly in Europe.

(emphasis mine)

FAQ

Is it legal to copy albums onto CD if you own the albums?
Owning an album is not the same as owning copyright in the music, lyrics and sound recordings that are embedded in
the album. If you are not the owner of copyright you will need permission to copy music from an album to CD even if
you have bought the album you want to copy.

Am I allowed to make a copy or compilation of music on a CD for private use?
There is no special exception which allows copying of CDs or cassettes for private use. In most cases you will need
permission from the owners of copyright in the music & lyrics (usually the music publisher) and the owners of
copyright in the sound recording (usually the record company).

Can I download music from the Internet and copy it onto CD?
The fact that material is made available on the Internet (for example, as an MP3 file) does not mean that it may be
used freely. Material on the Internet may still be protected by copyright. If this is the case, and the copyright
owners have not given permission to download and record their work, you will infringe copyright by reproducing the
music, lyrics and sound recording onto CD. Sometimes, copyright owners grant express permission to use their work.
You should look for such permissions on the site from which you are downloading.

Can I make backup copies of my music CDs?
Making a backup copy of a CD will involve making a reproduction of the music, lyrics and sound recordings on that CD.
The right to reproduce the work is one of the exclusive rights of the owners of copyright in those items. You may not
legally make a back up copy of a CD when the CD contains material that is protected by copyright unless you have
permission from the owner of copyright or a special exception applies to your use.

They very much fail to make clear that breach of copyright is only a criminal offence when the breacher makes money out of it (or breaches "to an extent that affects prejudicially the owner of the copyright" - quote from the law). Any other breaches ar

It's actually quite interesting if you read it. The law makes exemptions for "fair dealing" and then goes on to specifically mention some things that are included in "fair dealing". However the wording (to me at least) doesn't indicate that the list is an exclusive.

I think you'd have every chance to stand up in court and argue that making a backup copy of a CD you own is "fair dealing".

The reason that hasn't happened is because in the real world the record companies have no interest in stopping you doing that anyway. There is no money to be gained and they don't want to cause a weakening of the copyright law by creating a precedent that expands "fair dealing".

is that nobody seems to be objecting to the fact that the publisher is making the decision for you as to what program you use to play his pseudo-CD. I, personlly would be pretty shat off if I was forced to use stinkyfinger_1.0.1.exe as opposed to my preferred fucking_great_cd_player.exe.

Australia has a similar legal system, based on British common
law.
Their copyright law is likely similar in this regard too.

You can't copy CDs for personal use in Britain as it's not one of
activities listed in the fair use laws -- an activity has to be
explicitely exempted for it to be free from the restrictions
imposed by the copyright laws. See The UK Campaign For Digital Rights [ukcdr.org]
for more info, particularly the FAQ [ukcdr.org]

As an apology for the inconvenience caused by being unable to play the CD, he'll be getting a Norah Jones T-shirt and DVD. However, for making an unauthorized copy of the CD, he'll be sued for $97 trillion.

Unfortunately, we are seeing more and more of this attitude by the record companies.

I listen to most of my music at work using my PC and my headphones. So my wife recently got me the new Phil Collins CD... for me to find out that I can't listen to it on a PC.

All that this achieves is that I'm being pushed towards downloading the tracks so that I can listen to them. At that point, what stops me from not being the CD since it won't work for me? The record companies will end up shooting their own foot off...

I have nothing against buying reasonably priced CD's. However, I do not think that 20 euros is reasonable (although Switzerland is fortunately quite a bit cheaper than that).

Maybe I should write to Phil himself.. what do artists think about it?

I listen to most of my music at work using my PC and my headphones. So my wife recently got me the new Phil Collins CD... for me to find out that I can't listen to it on a PC.

I don't have a laptop, unfortunately, or I'd try this... Go to a big music store with your laptop (some time when you've got a lot of free time). Bring along a printout of the Redbook standard (the one that they have to comply with if they want to put that little Phillips 'Compact Disc' logo on the disc).

Buy a Phil Collins CD that you know is copy protected. Bring it over to the service desk. Open the CD in front of them, stick it in your laptop, have it fail to play, and insist that it's broken and you want another one.
Go get another one, open it, and do the same thing.

Repeat until you've opened the shrinkwrap on every copy of the CD, forcing the store to either re-wrap them or (more likely) send them back to the manufacturer as defective (at the manfacturer's cost).

I don't know if any of you are old enough to remember the "look for the Union label" jingle. However, what you need to do as far as CDs go is "look for the CD-DA logo."

From what I understand, Royal Dutch Philips is actively looking for CDs labeled as proper Red Book compliant, non-broken CD-DA CDs but which are copy-limited, and therefore broken. If that Phil Collins and/or Norah Jones CD has the logo, but does not conform to the Red Book standard, Philips needs to be let know so they can SUE. And they have specifically said they WILL sue if cases like that are brought to their attention.

If the CD DOES NOT bear the CD-DA logo, you can't do this. But if it does...you can put a world of hurt on the music industry strictly by bringing this to their attention.

This sounds sort of like something I just submited involving cd key protected software and my current situation in which the only way I will be able to use the software is to download a pirated copy since I lost the manual with the key. Copy protection makes life twice as dificult for pirates while making it 10 times as difficult for regular paying customers...
And ive never goten a chance to say this before but... FP?

I always write the key on the disk itself. No need to have the CD break if the package is lost. Instead of downloading a pirate copy of the CD, just do a search for the product CD key. Google is your friend. I have had to do this for a copy of Win98 when a machine had the HD fail. The disk (Original with full hologram) was in a CD binder. Nobody knew where the packaging was.

I hate to install from originals. One thing I like to do is copy the disk, but instead of making a disk-to-disk copy, I'll add a text file containing the CD-key, and then copy the files over. As long as there is no funky disk formatting, this works great.

Then when I install from the copy, not only do I have the key, I can also just open it up in textpad and copy and paste it. I hate typing those 20+ letter codes - I don't know how dyslexics do it!

CD keys aren't really intended for "Copy protection" at all (other than in the online gaming world, where it can be checked against a server containing all valid keys).

They exist so that each copy of the program is serialized, and they can in theory, identify your identity if you leak the CD key to pirates. Of course, the way to thwart that is not register at all -- unless you have to do that silly Microsoft activation thing.

In the console world, we're a bit more enlightened, and never bother with such asinine methods such as "CD keys".

I have a similar story -- back in the day I bought a copy of Steinberg LM4. The copy protection *only* worked in win98 (read: wouldn't install on 2k even though 2k was a supported platform for Cubase). The only way for me to get it running was to install it on a win98 box, copy the samples to my 2k machine and then you guessed it, install the cracked version -- even thought I was *trying* to be legit and pay for the god damn software. Guess what? Im still using the cracked version -- it doesn't ask for a CD every fucking time you start it.

Good for you:) However LM4 definatley wouldn't install in Win2k. It was a known issue by steinberg and their response was more or less "bugger off." They eventually released a patch *almost a year* later that installed the LM4 software -- but it couldn't extract the samples. Unfourtantely Steinberg seems to have yanked the knowledge base articles for programs as old as lm4 so the only proof that im not a complete idiot is the LM4 Update [steinberg.de] which lists "Win2000 support".

Several years ago I bought a copy of the game "Need for Speed 3". I also have two CD drives. The copy protection on the game insisted that the CD was always in the wrong CD drive, and refused to run. I found two solutions:

1) unplug one CD or DVD drive. Of course this is stupid. I have to power down, unplug the drive, and power up. Now I can't use my CD or DVD drive.

2) download a crack from the internet, copy the game, and play using the copy.

I purchased the Norah Jones CD (Valentines day gift for my fiancé). She wanted them as MP3s for her XP laptop, so I copied the wave files off the CD using the cdfs.vxd replacement.http://www.sonicspot.com/alternatecd fsvxd/alternat ecdfsvxd.html

No it doesn't, this is illegal. Copyright Act 1968 (CTH) defines reproduction thusly;S21(1A)For the purposes of this Act, a work is taken to have been reproduced if it is converted into or from a digital or other electronic machine-readable form, and any article embodying the work in such a form is taken to be a reproduction of the work.

And more importantly defines the exclusive rights of the copyright holder as;S31 1(b)in the case of an artistic work, to do

Is there a linux solution like this? An alternate iso9660 driver, that lists audiotracks as wavs?

As little googling would have tould you, there are several such filesystems for linux. I myself use audiofs. It's as easy to use as "mount -t audio/dev/cdrom/cdrom". Actually, if the cd does not have an iso9660 filesystem, the "auto" filesystem can detect it automatically.

Because judging by the way things are going with RIAA very soon we won't be able to listen to a CD unless we actually buy concert tickets beforehand

Actually, the exact opposite is starting to happen, to an extent; that is, record companies are starting to build in "added value" to CD's to entice you to actually buy the CD instead of just downloading the tracks. Here in Canada, The Tragically Hip [thehip.com] did something involving cheaper concert tickets [thehip.com] for people who bought their latest album; Wilco [wilcoworld.net] put an EP's worth of.mp3 files [wilcoworld.net] up for download for people who could enter a code from the packaging of their last album [wilcoworld.net]. This is another odd, unforeseen consequence of.mp3 sharing; record companies have to earn their money when they sell albums and are doing all sorts of stuff, like bundling DVD's with CD's (J5 [jurassic5.com] did that with their last album), or using contests, on-line content or other swag to actually separate you from your buck.

I assume that the mediaplayers he tried to use (which, judging by the way the article is worded, is the default player on each system) failed to 'pick it up' when he inserted the disc. Most, if not all, CD-burning software I am aware of is able to make a copy of a CD even if the format isn't recogniced - usefull when I copy a CD with a linux-distro on it on a Win9x box.

My girlfriend (yes I have one!!) got a copy protected CD that she couldn't play on her Windows laptop. I found that ripping it with gRip (cdparanoia) in Linux and then reburning the resulting wave files did the trick.

Well, I had a "Copy protected" CD, and it wouldn't even mount in my iBook. So I took it to a friends place an coppied the CD using Nero (WinXP box), I made sure that I unchecked the "Ignore illegal TOC" box, but I'm not sure if it made the difference.
The coppied CD ripped just fine.

The irony of having to copy a CD to get around copy protection is just hilarious. What's even funnier is that I will probably give the copy away to someone since I now have no use for it.

CD's are a completely digital encoding of the audio, with error correction codes (Reed-Solomon). Unless the original is scratched so badly that playback is affected, copies that you make will be perfect. (If it is badly damaged, you'll probably get error messages when you try and rip)

CD audio is just 16 bit PCM, like most WAV files. When you copy WAV files around, quality isn't lost. Why would it be on a CD? I can rip a CD to AIFF or WAV, burn it to CD, and compare and get the same audio data back, bit for bit.

Now, if the CD is stored in a lossy format (MP3), before reburning it, you might have a point. But CD copying software tends not to do that (except jukebox apps like ITunes).

Return the defective CD under his country's consumer rights law. If enough people do this, then the companies might rethink the whole idea. Many people use DVD players as a CD for their stereo systems. Why should a CD not work in them?

The irony of one copy protected disc is that it plays happily in my portable CD player, it plays happily in my PS2, it almost plays happily in one of my PCs, (It reads audio but screws up the index positions of the last 5 tracks - combining them into one) it doesn't on my other PC, it doesn't play in my brothers car CD changer and it freaks out his DVD player to such an extent it refuses to read other discs for a while...

So thats 2 non-PCs can play it, 2 non-PCs can't play it, 1 PC can play it, 1 PC can't

One issue that people don't see with these discs is that even if they work on whatever hardware you have now that doesn't mean it will work in what you buy later.

With a CD you know it will work in anything with a CD logo on it. With these things you could find in five years time that you don't have any hardware that will play it.

When my bog standard CD player dies I'm unlikely to replace it. I already have two PCs, an xBox and a DVD player that should be perfectly capable of playing my music but won't these discs don't work (or at least the one disc I tried).

If particular versions of copy protection are only employed for a short period time then future hardware manufacters aren't going to worry too much about compatibility with every single different type.

That's why I took 100th Window back and why I haven't bought one of these discs since. And I used to buy 3-4 CDs a month.

Those music disks are not 'copy protected', they are 'playback crippled'.

The best (or worst, depending of if you are an exec of a user) the record companies can do is to make their products a little bit more inconvenient to make copies of. They do this by making it more difficult (but never ever impossible) or time consuming to make copies. That is all.

To call it 'protection' is like wrapping your wiener in toilet paper and calling it a condom. It's stupid, it doesn't get yhe job done and it's only uncomfy. (I think, haven't tried it.)

A friend just bought the latest Massive Attack CD. When he got back from the store I asked if I could have a listen to it on my PC at work (NT4 *shudder*)... when I did it did not load my default Winamp, but instead automatically, with no prompting, installed its own player which proceded to crash... leaving me with no way of listening to the CD.

I've also come across this with some other CDs I own (Although not Norah Jones funnily enough).

Christ. Get the mp3s. If there are no mp3s og oggs, borrow the CD from someone and make mp3s and oggs and publish them. If we can make sure rapid dispertion of high-quality copies of copy-protected works - plus we don't buy the crippled hardware they offer us, then the effect of crippling the discs will be negative. All it takes is a high quality cd/dvd-player with digital output paired with a pc that accepts digital input. Then, you'll have a pretty good quality copy of any crippled cd even if they made it

Bought a copy protected CD, which was from EMI. Couldn't listen to it so I made a copy for myself. Then I mailed the original CD back to EMI with note saying what I had to do just to listen the CD and here's the original back, I won't need it, my 20 euros for fighting piracy.

The CD(s) concerned are protected by EMI's favourite copy protection system "Copy Control". You can tell by the little C.D.A.T.A logo on the data-side inside rim. We've been getting these CDs regularly at the radio atation I work for, and for computer previewing they're a real pain.

The way the protection works is by adding tracks (containing corrupt CD-R data) after Track 1 (containing the audio data). This is fine for AudioCD players because they only read Track 1. Standard CD-ROM drives also have no problem, because they ignore the data they can't understand (I think it's a form of corrupt extra session data).

CD-R/CD-RW/Combo drives however attempt to find these extra sessions/writeable areas and when they fail, assume the CD is corrupted and eject it.

What a fantastic copy control scheme, huh? Can't read the disk with a burner, but you can certainly copy it by doing a CD-ROM -> CD-RW copy. And then you can play the burnt copy. Ingenious.

I also wrote to EMI and to News Limited (in response to an earlier story they ran) about my troubles, but neither cared (possibly because I hadn't purchased the CDs in question, they were radio use only).

No way dude, you are all wrong.Regular CD-ROM drives can't read the copy protected CDs, whilst CDRW drives can. Why? They are a) newer (When did you upgrade your CDROM drive the last time? Do you even have one?) b) smarter. A regular CDRW drive has much more control of it's reading mechanism. Pop your copy protected CDs into a new Plextor drive, and voila!

from the article (EMI's answer)
"As the technology was created to be played through its own embedded player on the CD itself and not any other player that is currently available to the PC/Apple, it will cause anomalies if played in any other manner."
Wasn't the technology (CD) created to be played on any compliant CD reader (may it be a Standalone Audio player or a CD-ROM from ANY computer platform).
OK, so they are not standard. And they say so in the artwork (don't they?). So the should prohibit them to sell those non-CD mixed with the REAL CD (with the CD-AUDIO label) because they are confusing the consumer (at least with Spain's laws, this could be defendable). They should place them in the NON-CD-AUDIO department of the department stores and NOT in traditional music stores.
Let see what they think of copy protection then.
Just my 0.02

I was puzzled by it myself. As far as I have understood, a CD has to comply to one of the standards to be a CD - which make these copy-protected discs 'near-CDs'. I think I read something about Phillips - who holds the rights to the CD - throwing a hissy cow a while back over these crippled discs beeing labeled as CDs, but I can't find the link right now. Any takers?

"Mr. Wirtz said future Philips machines will likely be able to both read and burn the protected CDs -- a proposition that may land the company in the crosshairs of the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act, or DMCA."

"Netherlands giant Philips Electronics has lobbed a grenade into the audio copy protection arena by insisting that that CDs including anti-copying technology should bear what is effectively a plague warning. They should in Philips' view clearly inform users that they are copy-protected, and they shouldn't use the "Compact Disc" logo because they are not, in Philips' considered view, proper compact discs at all."

I recently bought the latest opus of "Asian Dub Foundation" which wasn't carrying Philips CDDA logo but some "copy-protected-whatever logo instead.I tried it in a pc.It launched a shitty player.I put it in my iBook, I could iTune it, except the first track.I then clicked on the audio cd icon and could import the last track by just drag'n dropping it on the desktop, then encoding it in iTune.I guess Copy-protected is some kind of MS trademark:-)

...I was waiting for that CD to come back in at work before I could buy it again. But since I lsiten to all of my music on my Mac, I guess I won't be buying it. Or, worst case, I'll just download the tracks off of iTunes Music Store and make my own CD.

Yay, copy-protection technology; costing you more business than it will "save" you.

I'm also in Australia, and I bought the Norah Jones CD. It wouldn't play on my Windows2000 box at work, nor my Mandrake9.1 machine at home. I tried to copy the CD, but I couldn't get the data off it digitally without getting a whole bunch of clicks and pops. Luckily a friend of mine had a US copy of it, so I copied that, and all is well. I vowed never to buy another CD from EMI ever again.

The next day my girlfriend went out and bought Ben Harper's "Diamonds on the Inside", which was released by EMI and fe

Of course, we should boycott artists and record companies that use copy protection (playback protection?). But we should do it in a way that causes the most inconvenience for the stores and record companies:

Buy the record as usual. Keep the receipt.

Return the record the next day, claiming that it doesn't work. Get a second disc, "just to see if that works".

Return the second one as well, and claim a refund. Say that you've found out that the copy protection interferes with your CD players. You don't have to mention computers or copying, just say that it doesn't work.

Make sure the record store notifies the record company instead of just putting the record back on the shelf.

The store is obliged to pay the refund when the product doesn't work. A "copy protected" disc is not a CD, even if it's (misleadingly) sold as one.

I heard that the latest, copy protected, Robin Williams album was sold in more than 100.000 copies in my country. No more than 10 discs were returned. Let's make that number higher!

I bought a re-released DVD the other day from Walmart made by MGM. It was an 80's movie, but re-released under some new profit scam, I'm sure, in 2003.

I took it home, and...you guessed it. It wouldn't play with WMP 8, Real, or WinDVD in any of 4 drives I tried on two machines. I did find some old shareware player that would play it, but it was a crap player, and I couldn't stand the jumpiness, digital blocking, and other fine artifacts whilst I watched.

So, I trotted it's little shiny ass right back to Walmart, stood in line for 20 minutes, and, after reading the "no refunds on opened CDs, DVDs or Software" about 412 times, I got to the front of the line. I handed the 17 year old girl my DVD, which she inspected closely.

"Yeah, it's been opened," I said. "It's ok. I just need a refund." "Uhhhh, sir? We don't really...ummm...do refunds...on...ummm...opened...uhhh...stuff like this."

I grinned, and said, "That's ok. Just need my money back, thanks. It doesn't work." I was thinking to myself, how do I explain DVD copy protection to this girl without making her head explode or having her gnaw her arm off to escape?

"Well, I can't really...ummm...give a refund on this. Would you like to exchange it for another one?" "Nope," I said with a smile. "Just my money back. Thanks."

She pointed to the tiny sign about no refunds on DVDs and said "Well, we have a policy..." I interrupted her with my best Fargo-esque Minnesota accent, "Hey, you betcha. Y'know...Yeah, I see your big sign right there...yeah, that one. Hey, that's great. 'Satisfaction Guaranteed' Wow. That sign's gotta be 12 feet tall, huh? Dontcha figure that sorta makes this little one here not really all that important?" She stared at me blankly (We're in Portland, not Minnesota, and I don't think she got it.)

"Yeah, ummm...I'm gonna have to call my manager." "Not a problem," says I, with a chorus of groans from the people in line behind me...So, the manager shows up, and she's gotta be at LEAST 19, with a cool ring of keys around her wrist. GOTTA be important stuff, huh? The clerk hands her the DVD with a conspiratorial look at me..."it's been opened..." she whispers quietly to the manager.

So, after a 5 minute diatribe about the horrors of this copy protection crap, she just shook her head, "We can't return this." At which point I pulled out my cell phone (which was off), punched 911 so she could see me, and said, "Are you suure? I've got nothing else to do tonight."

So, I got my money back.

Return your DEFECTIVE DVDs and CDs. If we don't, all we're doing is encouraging them!

If you have a laptop (I don't, otherwise I'd do this) - do it in front of 'em... Take the unopened CD/DVD to the service desk - open it in front of the clerk, have it not work in your machine, insist that it's broken and get another one. Repeat until they run out of copies. THEN insist on getting your refund. The 'we don't take opened returns' is theoretically to prevent you taking them home and copying them and then returning them. Opening the disc in front of the manger, though, should make it obvious you're not burning copies.

Copy protection only works in systems that have been designed from the ground up to be copy protected.

Any video or audio that is decodeable on a PC can be hijacked from that same PC.

The only way to protect your data is to control the hardware. The only reason DVDs are hard to copy is because you can't get a DVD-r that has the same capacity.

the MPIAA is in a much better situation compared to the RIAA considering cd audio is already good enough, that consumers don't really feel the need to switch to a higher quality version of the CD. Where on the other hand, DVDs are much better than VHS tapes, and have the added benefit of being harder to copy.

they can't yet put copy "protection" on an analog signal; which everything that makes sound must eventually send to an output. then we have a beautiful little thing called an analog input that makes ALL copy protection pointless.

if the primary purpose for the copy "speedbump" is to keep the MP3's off file sharing networks i.e. Kazaa, then it's not going to work. there is someone out there patient enough to encode in real time while listening to the cd.

the problem thw RIAA and Co. face is: the file sharing networks - not the consumer that wants to listen to his/her new cd on the computer or make a backup copy because the originals always get all scratched up on the floorboard of the car.

are they (record companies) so scared? No one wants to rip them off. Most people are going to buy their albums, regardless of format. Sure, some people will steal their stuff, and I have grabed some albums from friends that I never bought, but that;s how it works. I buy most of my music, but I have bought bad music and I can't get a refund.

I guess my point is, they should really stop alienating their customers. I have never seen a business model that treats their customers so badly. People are still going to buy your albums! We made copies of cassette tapes, we're going to make copies of CD's and were giong to make copies of MP3's. Get over it, it's how it works. You're still going to make so much money! Get over it, ok?

They're probably spending more money fighting this stupid war on whatever than they are going to save. All they are doing is making people resent them and want to steal from to the point where smart people are going to keep cracking their stuff and become passionate about distributing it all. Another day, another enemy for the RIAA. Because of their actions, I would wadger that they have made many people angry to the point where they don't want to buy their albums, where they want to steal their albums and frankly, it's a war they will not win. You cannot go to war with your consumers. They are your friends!

Think about it, what other business would do this? If you walked into a store and they started accusing you of stealing and would only sell you things in such a way where you were oblivious to most of what it contained and treated you like shit all around, who would come back? I'm getting to the point where I'm going to want to steal all their music, just to spite them.

In short, they need to settle down and just accept the market as it is. They choose a digital format because it is VERY cheap to make, thus increasing profits one billion fold and yet cannot cope with the fact that this cheap medium will also allow people to send a "free" album out to someone from time to time.

And lets face it, I would bet most albums people download etc are albums they probably would not buy in the first place. How many play lists of people have you seen that have tons of songs you know they would never buy anyways?

Anyways, the main point is that the customer just BOUGHT the album, WTF are you doing? They B-O-U-G-H-T it!

The RIAA screwed up bigtime. You just towed the party line "Most people actually want to PAY for their music. They steal it out of convenience." The RIAA's response? "No, they steal it because they're cheap bastards." Oh, wait...except for the APPLE MUSIC STORE, which beat their one _month_ expectations in one _week_.

Oh, poo, it appears that the guilty-until-proven-innocent idea the RIAA was operating under was just demonstrated to be wrong, at least among macintosh users. (Granted its a population subset, but the RIAA has 0 data to the contrary....) But the apple music store makes those nice record labels obsolete minus their functions "discovering" (pronounced: "manufacturing" c.f. avril lavigne) artists and "producing" songs. (long live daniel beddingfield....)

You didn't realise that cdparanoia takes a parameter telling it which tracks to rip (e.g. "cdparanoia 2-" for track 2 to last track). This is explained in the first few lines of the manual. So you rummaged around the raw source code of cdparanoia and changed it before you looked at its manual.

You used diff without the -U option, and didn't even tell us which file you commented out the exit() in. Which file is it? What's the context?

You used a C++/C99 comment delimiter in what is a C89 source code. Hope you have have a lax compiler that defaults to C99 or ignores standards, because it'll choke on that.

You made a web-page about it and posted it on Slashdot, no doubt causing much wailing and gnashing of teeth from people even less experienced at editing source code than you, when all they needed to do was run the cdparanoia command differently.

"You didn't realise that cdparanoia takes a parameter telling it which tracks to rip (e.g. "cdparanoia 2-" for track 2 to last track). This is explained in the first few lines of the manual. So you rummaged around the raw source code of cdparanoia and changed it before you looked at its manual."

No, track 1 is marked as a data track but contains audio - if you rip cdparanoia 2- you will miss off the first track, and cdparanoia 1- fails because it refuses to rip a data track. I've read the cdparanoia manual

I purchase the CD and try to play it at work on Windows 2000 and it just isn't recognised... WinAmp insisting that no audio CD was in the drive.

So to listen to the album on my PC I just downloaded the bloody thing from alt.binaries.sound.mp3.complete_cd

Not illegal in any way since I now own the original... but bloody stupid and makes me realise that the only way I may now enjoy EMI releases at work will be to download a copy... which really defeats everything their system is trying to stop.

I wonder whether this "CD" bore the Compact Disc logo we all know and love. If it did then perhaps he should email Philips and let them know - Philips don't (or at least didn't) take too kindly copy-proctected cd's using the compact disc logo. This is because by baring the logo it claims to be a proper "Red Book" cd, but isn't because it has copy protection.

Does anyone actually know who (if anyone) in Philips to bother about this? As I've just discovered that a supposed "cd" (it bears the logo) that I own is copy protected and I'm in a record label bashing mood.

Before being allowed to purchase a CD you will have to have your house RIAA DRM certified. RIAA operatives will removed from your house any equipment that could possibly be used to infringe upon their artists copyrights. Illegal items include, CD duplicators, PCs, Tape recorders, Video Recorders, wax disks, loudspeakers (you NOT your neighbours have bought the right to enjoy our music). Music shall be listened to through a single (approved) mono-earpiece (some listeners with stereo ear-pieces have abused the priviliedge and let others 'sample' the music using the spare ear bud).After your music purchase an RIAA representative (probably a student trying to pay off $97 trillion) will sit with you at all times to ensure your compliance with our terms and conditions."We hope you enjoy your music purchase and continue to support your record industry"p.s. Squeal little piggy!

Lower the price of CD's!
Ok, it costs a lot to make a CD. You need to spend a time in the studio. (expensive) You need to make sure it souds right. (not so expensive, I guess) And you need to promote it (expensive).Then why in the name of all holy cows does the anniversary Dark Side of the Moon cost the same as the newest girl/boy band CD?
You don't need to record it, you don't need to promote it. (Have you seen much Pink Floyd on MTV lately?) You just remix it and press it. Voila! You have a great CD that people will buy, even though they have at least 2 versions already of that album!
I don't give a rat ass anymore about RIAA...

Copy protection licencing is sufficiently expensive and a hassle to the producers that's it's only used on 'popular' artists. So take that as a hint and listen to 'unpopular' ones.

Spend your CD money on world, jazz, classical, flamenco, folk, blues, celtic, indie or anything else outside the mainstream - but just stay away from the popular artists. There's a vast world of great music out there to be discovered - help out the artists, broaden your horizons, and give the big music companies a kick in the pants. Furthermore if they see their cd sales drop, but cd sales in general rise they're not stupid enough that they won't draw conclusions.

The thing that seems to be missed most in these discussions is loosing and regaining your purchased material. When I buy my music I buy a LICENSE to listen to that music. Lets face it, the cd cost a couple of bucks, where does the rest of the money go. The pysical media cost next to nothing.

I was unlucky enough to have almost my entire cd collection stolen (yeah no insurance but there u go) and I'll put it straight: There is no way in hell that im going to fork out the hundreds of dollars to get them back again. I have already paid for my license to listen to the material I purchased a long time earlier. I am merely regaining the physical media to execute that license.

I can't believe that the recording industry believes that locking down CDs, making them less versitile, and restricting where you can play them is going to make them a more attactive product than a free MP3. Please, at least give me some reason to feel guilty.
I suppose the dinosaurs trapped in the La Brea tar pits thrashed around a bit before they went under as well.....

"Once there, he tried to listen to his new acquisition, using his Titanium laptop which runs version 10.2 of Apple's operating system. There was no response, with the disc not being recognised.

One can't blame Marovitch for not trying - he tried to listen to the disc on a workstation which runs Windows 2000 and then on one which runs Windows XP.

In both cases, he got no joy. The disc was not picked up by the system. "

from EMI:

"As the technology was created to be played through its own embedded player on the CD itself and not any other player that is currently available to the PC/Apple, it will cause anomalies if played in any other manner."

Now.. could someone explain to EMI how hard it is to use an embedded player on the CD itself when your computer system cant even see the CD ?

You must remember that, up until VERY recently, all CDROM drives have a little "play" button on them that will blindly seek to track 1 and start playing redbook audio through it's analog and/or digital output ports (you know, the little thin cable that you can never find when you're trying to hook up your CDROM drive to "AUX" on your sound card). You don't even need to have an OS booted -- just supply power to the CDROM drive and press the little button and it will play.

I had to do this with a CD last year because of some old CD players we have at home. I e-mailed Sen. Hatch about it and explained in detail what I had to do and why I had to do it. I then pointed out that the music industry was 'forcing' me to make copies of their CDs in order to be able to use what I had paid for.I also told him that I copy every single computer CD that I get and only use the copies so that my originals won't get ruined. I would do the same with DVDs if I could. I don't steal software, but I copy everything I have. Luckily, I pointed out, I am knowledgeable enough to get around all of these copy protection schemes; but most people aren't and it is illegal for me to help them.

Everyone should write their congresscritters and legislators about their experiences like this so that they will be more aware of the problem. Be a squeaky wheel.

The long-time stance of the Slashdot crowd has been that if digital music distribution were made available to bands, they'd see more of the revenue from music sales. I was listening to the radio last night and heard the band "Cold" talking about MP3s. Their stance seemed to be that the money earned from CD sales is owed to the record labels for the work they do promoting the music, pushing the concerts (something that apparently generates a lot of revenue for the band), and making sure their songs get played on the radio.

This seemed completely backwards to me. Cold has basically bought into the line that they need the RIAA for promotion, and they're willing to give up their revenue from CD sales in exchange. It was the first time I'd heard a band actually come out and say this.

I think the digital music battle has a long way to go if artists fail to understand that what digital distribution offers is a way to break free from the record labels. I can't believe that so many artists are willing to give up their CD revenue in exchange for promotion and production costs as long as they still get their take of the concert sales.

Last week I sat down to work and wanted to listen to "The Very Best of Fleetwood Mac". It sounded terrible in Windows Media... Grumble, "Crappy Program."

Tried Real Jukebox that came with my Yamaha CD-F1, wouldn't recognize the disc in the drive. "Hmm..."

Look at the back of the CD case and in 4 pt font there is something about "Made with Macromedia." Now I'm mad.

First I used Clone CD [www.elby.ch] to make a virtual CD image on the hard disk. This program is great, for making backup copies of CDs or allowing you to play a game with "Please insert original CD in drive D:". It is $40 well spent.(I'm in no way affiliated with elby.)

Now I had a readable image. Next I used CDEx [n3.net] to remove the copy protection from the image and create a Redbook compliant CD. CDEx is free from SourceForge. Hat's off to an impressive program.

Ahhh... Now I can listen to my new CD while I work. I wasn't copying to CD to copy it (it would have been more cost effective to buy another, as this process took an hour and I get paid more than $15/hr...) I space-shifted the CD so I could listen to it in the device of my choice.

I've never downloaded an MP3 from P2P, and have no intention to do so. It is very frustrating not to be able to sit down and listen to a CD that I just bought. (Actually, it was a gift from my sister.) Also, I typically make one copy to use in my car and keep the original in my home CD changer. Car CD's tend to get damaged easily.

While there are a lot of things going on in Copywriteland that I'm worried about, this isn't one of them. While it's true that consumers often adopt technologies that only serve to benefit the manufacturer of the particular technology, they only do so through laziness. Most people don't have the time or energy to boycott a product that they are 90% happy with because of one or two usage-limiting "features" that they will never see even if in theory they don't like them.

In this case, however, laziness plays the exact opposite role. While pirates are going to step up to the plate and see this as a challenge (perhaps even a welcome one), your average consumer simply won't buy a product that doesn't work in the way they believe it should (in this case, CDs that, well, actually play). It might take a while since public knowledge of this scheme is still very low, but all it's going to take for your average person is one such incident as cited in the article, and you can bet they'll stop buying cd's with those new-fangled operating instructions on the artwork.

In a couple years these ridiculous, half-assed protection schemes are going to be chalked up as a lesson in business failure in some MBA textbook, and beyond that will only be history.
In Soviet Russia, the KGB makes unauthorized copies of you.

More and more people (like me?) just DON'T have any CD players at all!

I have a DVD player in my living room, which I doubt will be able to play those disks (heck it can't do CDRs/CDRWs).
I usually play my CD's on my computer and then redirect the audio to my home theater system.
Will I have to become a pirate to listen to my future CDs?

I guess this also raises the question whether or not you own the media or the songs on the media? What do you pay for? The right to listen to the songs (if so, can other people around you listen too?) or the right to listen to *that* media only? (then you can't make MP3s for your walkman/car player?)

It seems like the fact that you can't play that CD on some hardware is some sort of discrimination. You can't fully enjoy your CD. Will record companies refund you a part of the price since you can't play it on all your players? If you own the right to listen to the song, would making a copy be legal in that case?